If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

No reason to bash him. He probably just wasn't aware of the whole scenario cause when it's talked about in main stream media all the details aren't mentioned. Including the fact he wasn't ours in the first place.

IIRC, Reds offered the Cubs money to use their selection on him and trade him to the Reds. Cubs decided $50k(?) profit was worth more than using their pick (I can't remember if they even had room or not). They never had any intention of keeping Hamilton.

No reason to bash him. He probably just wasn't aware of the whole scenario cause when it's talked about in main stream media all the details aren't mentioned. Including the fact he wasn't ours in the first place.

Answer me this: could the Cubs have drafted Josh Hamilton? That's really all that matters. He was there. They could have taken him and played him. Isn't that correct?

Few teams were willing to take that risk. His drug problems were a MAJOR concern and keeping him rostered was likely going to be very difficult...and its a risk the Reds were willing to take. They clearly made the right call on the situation and butched it trading him for Volquez. Plain and simple. No need to bicker back and forth about it.

Answer me this: could the Cubs have drafted Josh Hamilton? That's really all that matters. He was there. They could have taken him and played him. Isn't that correct?

Yes, they could have. However, the only reason they took him in the rule 5 draft was because the Reds asked them to, with money being given back as compensation. If the FO says "sure, we'll take him for you with the full intention of giving him to you for money" and then reneges on that agreement, you can imagine the backlash from that. The Cubs weren't going to pick him up. The Reds asked them to.

It might reflect on that front office's lack of willingness to see a project in the making, or maybe they didn't want to deal with the risk. Either way, it's not something worth getting upset about. This kind of deal happens all the time. It's rare that the rule 5 draft produces anything of value, anyway...even more rare that it produces Hamilton's kind of value. The Cubs thought they had they're CF of the future in Felix Pie and were a bad team willing to give a kid a chance to prove himself. Hamilton was a drug addict that was an absolutely huge risk to leave on a major league roster all year.

That fact that Josh Hamilton was in the rule 5 should say something about how bad his situation was at that time. Weren't the cubs also good then, so keeping him on the roster would have been difficult?

That fact that Josh Hamilton was in the rule 5 should say something about how bad his situation was at that time. Weren't the cubs also good then, so keeping him on the roster would have been difficult?

That fact that Josh Hamilton was in the rule 5 should say something about how bad his situation was at that time. Weren't the cubs also good then, so keeping him on the roster would have been difficult?

They weren't good, no. They had a lot of potential and were expecting Prior to be a solid part of the rotation still. But, Hamilton was nowhere in their plans.

2006 turned out to be one of the worst in recent memory, but I don't really think any fault should be placed on management for not keeping Hamilton. Fault can be placed elsewhere for previous management, however...

They weren't good, no. They had a lot of potential and were expecting Prior to be a solid part of the rotation still. But, Hamilton was nowhere in their plans.

2006 turned out to be one of the worst in recent memory, but I don't really think any fault should be placed on management for not keeping Hamilton. Fault can be placed elsewhere for previous management, however...

It was 2007.

They had just bought up Soriano, Lilly, DeRosa, and Marquis (and Piniella). They were fully expecting to contend (and they did).

Also, Prior's career in Chicago was hanging on by a thread at that point.

Yes, they could have. However, the only reason they took him in the rule 5 draft was because the Reds asked them to, with money being given back as compensation. If the FO says "sure, we'll take him for you with the full intention of giving him to you for money" and then reneges on that agreement, you can imagine the backlash from that. The Cubs weren't going to pick him up. The Reds asked them to.

It might reflect on that front office's lack of willingness to see a project in the making, or maybe they didn't want to deal with the risk. Either way, it's not something worth getting upset about. This kind of deal happens all the time. It's rare that the rule 5 draft produces anything of value, anyway...even more rare that it produces Hamilton's kind of value. The Cubs thought they had they're CF of the future in Felix Pie and were a bad team willing to give a kid a chance to prove himself. Hamilton was a drug addict that was an absolutely huge risk to leave on a major league roster all year.

On top of that, it was the 2006 Rule 5 draft. Time to get over it.

I'm over it. I only say something if it gets brought up. I just hate the whole 'oh the Cubs didn't pass on drafting Josh Hamilton', because in reality, they did. All of the circumstances around it don't refute the fact that the Cubs could have had him for free.